Himachal Pradesh High Court
Shashi Kumar Sharma vs . Sunder Singh & Another. on 5 August, 2022
Author: Vivek Singh Thakur
Bench: Vivek Singh Thakur
Shashi Kumar Sharma Vs. Sunder Singh & another.
.
CMPMO No. 344 of 2022 5.8.2022 Present: Mr.Karan Singh Kanwar, Advocate, for the petitioner.
CMPMO No. 344 of 2022 & CMP No. 10809 of 2022 Case of the petitioner is that in Eviction Petition filed by respondent No. 1 to evict the petitioner from rented premises, 'Delhi Cloth Mills' has been made respondent No. 1 through its Manager, naming petitioner as its Manager, whereas petitioner has been arrayed as party-respondent No.2 in the said petition. It has been further submitted that in para 16 of Rent Petition, respondent No. 1, himself has mentioned that Delhi Cloth Mills Ltd. stands abolished or wound up in the year 1991, but even despite that Delhi Cloth Mills has been arrayed as respondent No. 1 in the Rent Petition, but through present petitioner, reflecting him as Manager, which is a mischief.
Further that petitioner is running his shop in the name and style of M/s DCM Retail Store and he has nothing to do with 'Delhi Cloth Mills' and his concern is independent of 'Delhi Cloth Mills' and 'Delhi Cloth Mills' never remained tenant of respondent No. 1.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that aforesaid facts and circumstances were brought ::: Downloaded on - 05/08/2022 20:04:08 :::CIS to the notice of Rent Controller, and vide order dated 26.8.2021 .
Rent Controller itself had directed the landlord to confirm the details of 'Delhi Cloth Mills' and to again file particulars for service of said concern for 15.11.2021. Further that despite the aforesaid order, no particulars were either confirmed or filed in the Court and vide impugned order dated 7.3.2022 Rent Controller directed to serve Delhi Cloth Mill through petitioner either in person or through affixation without specifying the place of affixation where summons is to be affixed and in pursuance thereto summons issued to Delhi Cloth Mills has been affixed on the premises of petitioner and it has been considered that Delhi Cloth Mills stands served and has been proceeded ex parte. In the aforesaid circumstances, present petition has been filed assailing the impugned orders dated 7.3.2022 and 1.8.2022.
In the aforesaid circumstances, it has been submitted that being a nonexistent entity, it would not be possible to serve Delhi Cloth Mills and further that respondent Delhi Cloth Mills has been proceeded ex parte by Rent Controller and it is only petitioner who is aggrieved from the petition filed by respondent No. 1, therefore, notice should be confined only to respondent No. 1.
In the aforesaid circumstances, notice is only confined to respondent No. 1.
::: Downloaded on - 05/08/2022 20:04:08 :::CISNotice to respondent No. 1, returnable on .
22nd September, 2022, on taking steps within five days, be issued.
In the meanwhile, further proceedings in Case No. 5 of 2020, titled as Sunder Singh Vs. Delhi Cloth Mills pending in the Court of Rent Controller, Nahan, district Sirmour, r to Himachal Pradesh shall be deferred till next date of hearing.
CMP No. 10810 of 2022Allowed. The applicant/petitioner is exempted from filing translated copies of vernacular documents, at this stage, subject to filing of the same within seven days, as and when directed to do so.
The application stands disposed of.
Petitioner is permitted to use the downloaded copy of this order from the High Court Website and concerned authorities shall not insist for certified copy of the order, rather if need be, it can be verified from the High Court website or otherwise.
(Vivek Singh Thakur), Judge.
5th August, 2022 (Keshav) ::: Downloaded on - 05/08/2022 20:04:08 :::CIS .
::: Downloaded on - 05/08/2022 20:04:08 :::CIS